Saxby Chambliss

Mr. CHAMBLISS

Mr. CHAMBLISS. Mr. Speaker, we will continue the same dialog with the gentleman from the First District of Georgia [Mr. Kingston]. Mr. Speaker, one way that we look at the farm programs is not from the standpoint of is it a subsidy, because it really is not. The United States government makes an investment into our agriculture community, and a good example of it is with the peanut program. The peanut program is a highly criticized program, but the reason it is criticized is because most folks just do not understand it. What we do in the United States is we have invested over the last 10 years an average of $15 million a year into the peanut program. That program in Georgia alone last year was a $2.5 billion industry. I do not know how many jobs it created, just in the State of Georgia alone. Peanuts are grown from Texas all the way to Georgia, up the seaboard, all the way into Virginia. Mr. Speaker, really what our farm programs are are investments by the U.S. Government into our agriculture community, into our States, that create jobs, they provide an income for people, and we get a significant return off of those programs from the standpoint of income to our farmers, as well as providing crops.

Mr. CHAMBLISS

Mr. CHAMBLISS. If the gentleman will yield, he is absolutely right. Not only France but countries like Spain highly subsidize their farmers. They compete against us in the world market. We simply cannot do that and be able to make a profit in our agriculture community.

Mr. CHAMBLISS. The gentleman is exactly right. Let me tell the Members what we have been thinking about in the Committee on Agriculture, as far as the 1995 farm bill is concerned. We have in place now two agreements, the GATT agreement as well as the NAFTA agreements. Those two agreements are going to dictate certain requirements on the agriculture community from a subsidy standpoint. We know that when NAFTA and GATT are fully implemented, that we are going to have to transition into a true free world market, and we in the Committee on Agriculture are preparing to do that. We are working very diligently towards modifying and changing programs to ensure that our folks involved in agriculture are able to compete in the world market when those treaties are fully implemented.

Mr. CHAMBLISS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding to me. [[Page H 6380]] Mr. Speaker, he is exactly right. We in the Committee on Agriculture have been involved in trying to rewrite every single title of the agriculture programs in preparation for the 1995 farm bill, which is, without a doubt, going to be the most crucial farm bill that we have ever written in Congress. The reason it is going to be so crucial is that it is going to dictate how our agriculture community operates from now into the 21st century. Irrespective of what any segment of our country thinks, the agriculture community is still the backbone of the economy of this country. The reason they are is that we feed more people in this country than anybody else in the world does. We not only feed folks in this country, we feed folks all over the world. We grow the finest quality agricultural products of anybody in the world.

Mr. CHAMBLISS

Mr. CHAMBLISS. Mr. Chairman, I am deeply concerned that the American people mistakenly believe its Government can protect its people and soldiers from missile attack. Recent reports indicate that a significant majority of the American people believe that if ballistic missiles are used to attack the United States, the U.S. military can intercept them before they fall. Footage of our Patriot missile batteries shooting Iraqi scuds out of the sky during the gulf war have left the American people with a very false sense of their own security. As advanced as our theater and national missile defense capabilities have become over the years, the fact still remains that we are vulnerable. Since the end of the cold war and the demise of our No. 1 enemy, the number of rogue states that have acquired nuclear capability has increased dramatically. Additionally, the very fact that the former Soviet Union is embroiled in ethnic strife adds to our concerns about their existing nuclear stockpile. Mr. Chairman, H.R. 1530 represents the proper approach to missile defense. It provides the emphasis necessary on [[Page H5944]] missile defense, and it strikes the proper balance between national and theater missile defensive systems. In 1983, the great communicator Ronald Reagan called this Nation's science community to arms and challenged them to provide the ultimate defensive system. Through the years, tremendous strides have been made, and though the sacrifices are great, the consequences of failure are even greater. Mr. Chairman, the American people deserve no less than the very best defensive technology, and H.R. 1530 achieves that goal. Unfortunately, the Spratt amendment would chain this Nation to the outdated terms and assumptions contained in the ABM treaty we signed with a country that no longer exists. Furthermore, it rejects the necessary emphasis on national missile defense. I urge my colleagues to support the provisions of H.R. 1530 and reject the Spratt amendment.

Mr. CHAMBLISS

Mr. CHAMBLISS. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the Collins amendment. Mr. Chairman, the Clinger-Spence acquisition reform amendment will finish the job begun by the Congress last year. Consider the changes proposed by the amendment: Changing competition requirements so that they are reasonable, establishing commercial-like procedures for Government procurement, reforming procurement integrity so that it no longer stifles the process--making American companies more competitive on the international market--streamlining the burdensome certification process, and consolidating the many dispute resolution mechanisms into a single review board. These are all commonsense answers to the very real problem of red tape and an overly bureaucratic procurement process. This Congress is finally applying real-world family and business practices to our budgets and our administration of Federal programs. Why not apply these standards to Federal purchasers? I commend Chairmen Spence and Clinger for working so hard to bring this needed change to Government. Support the Clinger-Spence amendment.

Mr. CHAMBLISS

Mr. CHAMBLISS. Mr. Chairman, amid the revolution of change brought about by the collective voice of the American people last November, today we come together to consider the defense authorization bill. One of the very few absolute responsibilities of the Federal Government, as outlined by the Framers of our Constitution is to fully provide for the defense of our great Nation and this defense bill does it for the first time in several years. I would like to recognize the untiring efforts of the distinguished chairman of the National Security Committee to put together a defense bill that addresses the critical needs of our Armed Services. By realistically assessing needs and deficiencies, this bill strikes the necessary balance between readiness, quality of life procurement, and R&D. Concerns about a hollow military will soon fade, and the people of this Nation can once again feel secure that their brave men and women in uniform are the best trained, most modernly equipped, and ready force in the world. I would like to specifically commend Chairman Spence, together with R&D subcommittee Chairman Weldon, for including in the bill a needed provision that will begin the replacement of the recently cancelled TSSAM program. The bill contains $75 million dollars for the Air Force and Navy to continue working together to develop a mission-essential air to ground standoff weapon, to be known as JASSM. Other programs of critical importance to our national defense include full funding of the F-22 fighter program that will carry our air superiority well into the 21st century. For airlift, full funding of the C-17 program will mean that when situations arise overseas, this country will be capable of projecting its awesome force to every corner of the world. For these reasons, and for many other good decisions represented in this bill, I urge the Members' support of the defense bill. It is the right thing for the Nation. Our priorities are once again in place, and our military and our country will be the better for it.

Mr. CHAMBLISS

Mr. CHAMBLISS. Mr. Speaker, today the House will take up consideration of this country's foreign aid authorization bill in which we establish our foreign policy priorities. Last year as I campaigned throughout Georgia's Eighth District, I heard from folks who are very concerned about the amount of money we spend overseas while we have so many problems here at home, and I share that concern. Mr. Speaker, for those residents of central and south Georgia and for all citizens of this country, the new majority has shown its commitment to taking a fresh look at everything the Government does. Foreign aid is no exception. This bill today moves us in the right direction and will cut $1 billion from foreign aid spending in the upcoming budget. We must not lose sight, however, of the very real and numerous threats around the world to the freedoms we enjoy. As a member of the Committee on National Security, I have seen those threats. True, the cold war is over but the world has not magically become a safe place. For the first time in many years, this foreign aid bill today represents a measured attempt to prioritize our influence and interests abroad. The United States is truly the leader of the world and our foreign aid policy must reflect that role by supporting our friends and deterring our foes. I urge my colleagues to support this measure.

Mr. CHAMBLISS

Mr. CHAMBLISS. Mr. Chairman, today we will vote on an amendment to the clean water bill which will severely weaken the wetlands reform contained in this bill. H.R. 961 is a renewed investment and commitment in our Nation's clean water infrastructure. It reinstates the basic constitutional right to obtain compensation for takings. This bill unamended, will allow farmers and landowners to seek a determination of whether a wetland exists on their property. My farmers and landowners in the Eighth District of Georgia are in desperate need of relief from the overburdensome and heavily regulated Federal wetlands policy. H.R. 961, unamended, will give eighth district farmers and landowners in towns like Ashburn and Enigma the relief they need. The Republicans have promised the American people that the status quo will no longer be the norm. Unfortunately, this amendment does nothing to change the status quo. We have a responsibility to protect the environment, yet do so without over-regulating the farmers and businesses that drive our economy. I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' against any amendment which weakens wetlands reform.

Mr. CHAMBLISS

Mr. CHAMBLISS. Tom, that was not only true with the large manufacturers, whom we think of as being the ones who have the major problems with regulation by OSHA or EPA or whoever. Virtually every town meeting I had, and again, I had small business men, I had farmers, just folks on the street complaining to me about the various regulations that the Federal Government has issued that they are having to comply with, and they make absolutely no sense at all. Unfortunately, that is the shift which we made in this country over the last several years. We have gotten to where we have overregulated every segment of our society, and again, I heard the same thing you did. Folks are just so pleased that we have started moving in the right direction, that we again bring common sense back into the regulation industry in this country, and whether it is EPA, clean water, clean air, whatever it may be, we have to use common sense in adopting these regulations and allowing our agencies to issue these regulations. People were just extremely pleased that we are moving in that direction.

Mr. CHAMBLISS. Where you spend most of your time, right?

Mr. CHAMBLISS. Switching subjects, Tom, but along that same line again of reducing the Federal bureaucracy and particularly taking the Federal Government out of our daily lives, one thing that I heard at every single town meeting I went to was the flat tax. Folks want to know ``tell me about the flat tax: Do we really have a chance of getting the flat tax passed?'' Without even knowing all the details of the flat tax, the reason I found that people were so excited about the flat tax is that it reduces the Government involvement from the standpoint of the Internal Revenue being less involved in our daily lives. I use an example. I carry a 3 by 5 card with me, this is not exactly 3 by 5, but I use that example of taking your W-2 form and using the gross receipts that you received on your W-2 form, multiplying it by 17 percent, and you come up with a figure, you write the Government a check for that amount of money, you sign it. That is your tax return. The reaction I got on that was just extremely positive, because that is what has people in this country excited about this term of Congress. We are doing some things to finally dismantle the Federal bureaucracy, and to get things back to where the Founders of this country intended for them to be to start with. I do not know whether you heard anything about the flat tax or about the consumption tax, but I have sure heard a lot about it.

Mr. CHAMBLISS. My wife has taught school in the public school system in Colquitt County, my home county, for in excess of 20 years. My daughter is in her first year of teaching kindergarten in the public schools. I see what both of these ladies do on a weekly basis as far as teaching kids. That is where the core of our education system is. They do not go home at 3 in the afternoon. They are there until 5 or 6 in the afternoon. They are there at night. They are there on Sunday, working, preparing to teach those kids because they love what they do. That is what makes our education system in this country so great. It is not the bureaucrats in Washington that contribute to the positive side of the education system in this country, and that is what the folks at home are tired of. They are tired of bureaucrats in Washington dictating to them not only what their children will eat, but what school books that folks can choose from, what curriculum they will be taught and how they will be taught it. It is absolutely time that we did what the Founders and Framers of the Constitution of the United States intended, and that is to return the government of this country to the people of this country. And education is a prime area where I look for the Republican side of the House to really step forward and to do that, because by dismantling the Department of Education, which I am advocating that we do over some period of time, we are going to return the education of our children to the folks in the States and We do owe an obligation to the school systems of this country to help fund them. That is what our tax money needs to be spent for. But the folks on the local level need to be making decisions about how their children will be taught.

Mr. CHAMBLISS. I think you make a good point there, the fact that I have confidence in the local people in my home county and every single one of the 32 counties in my district that they can do a better job of running local programs than a bunch of bureaucrats in Washington can. That is the whole concept behind what we are doing now. The block granting that is going to be taking place is being done in a very thought-out manner. It is not being done hastily. It is being done only with programs that we have given serious consideration to, have listened to serious testimony about and have made conscious decisions that local folks are better able to spend their own tax money on their own programs than somebody in Washington. And I heard that time and time again. Thank goodness the folks in my district for the most part had seen through the school lunch debate before I ever got there. When I got to my town hall meetings and talked about school lunch programs, we had nothing but compliments for the fact that we are willing to give the local folks credit for the fact that they are capable of running these programs. They are the ones that run it anyway.

Mr. CHAMBLISS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman. I, too, have a district which is somewhat similar to the gentleman's. My district, which is in the very heart of the State of Georgia, stretches from the middle of the State all the way to the Florida line. I have three military installations in my district, two Air Force bases and a Marine Corps logistics base, and the balance of my district is made up primarily of agriculture and agribusiness industry as You know, we cover 32 counties in my district, and I did not get to all of them during the 3 weeks, but I got to most of them. I had a representative at some 15 town hall meetings that we did and another probably eight or nine civic club speeches that we gave. And everywhere we went, I heard the same echo of what you have just said, and that is we appreciate what you folks did during the first 100 days. We are proud to see that Congress has finally done something in the first place, but, more importantly, has done what it said it was going to do. I talked a lot about the fact that on September 27 of last year, we on the Republican side of the aisle made history in American politics. We not only made promises to the American people, but we were willing to put those promises in writing. For the first time in a long time, a group of politicians, the first time ever in American political history, a group of politicians came together and made promises to the American people and did every single thing we said we were going to do. And I kept hearing that over and over again in my district, not only that you made those promises and we are proud you kept them, but also, like you said, we do not want you to quit doing what you did. You have made a great start, but in order to get this country turned around, we have got to keep putting common sense back into Washington. Something that has long been missing up here. By doing what we did, we put a lot of common sense back into Washington, and I made a pledge to my folks in the Eighth District of Georgia that we are going to continue to do that. There were a couple of things that were of particular importance to the folks in my district. No. 1 was the balanced budget amendment. They were extremely disappointed that the Senate was unable to pass the balanced budget amendment, which is so crucial to the financial stability of this country. Congress over the past 25 years has shown it cannot balance the budget itself, and the people of this country demanded that a balanced budget be passed, and unfortunately we were not able to do that. But they have encouragement because of the fact that we in the Republican Conference have made an unconditional pledge that we are going to balance the budget of this country by the year 2002. While the folks in my district do not like to have their programs cut, nobody does, the folks in my district are willing to share in the reforms that have got to be made in order to get this country back on track and in order to get to that glide path to a balanced budget and in order to ultimately balance that budget by the year 2002. The other program that is extremely important to the folks in my district was the welfare reform bill we passed here in the first 100 days. I think, and the folks in my district absolutely wholeheartedly agree with me, that that is the cornerstone of the contract, and that is the most important thing that we did during the first 100 days. We have too many people in this country who need to go to work, who would go to work if work were available and if they did not have the incentive to stay on welfare, and folks out there are absolutely tired of the failed and dismal welfare system that we have in this country. They were really pleased and encouraged by the fact that finally a group of Congressmen were willing to stand up and say, by golly, we are going to reform this program, and we are going to put dignity back in the welfare system. And we are going to require those folks who can work that are on welfare, that are getting food stamps, to go to work. And the blue-collar folks out there, the white-collar folks, all the way up and down the line, the folks who work hard every week and pay taxes every week are simply tired of that system, and they were extremely encouraged by what we did with our welfare reform package. And I made another promise to them, that we are going to continue to work on that type of reform in this Congress.

Mr. CHAMBLISS. I think it is very remarkable that here, Tom, you are from Iowa, Brian, you are from California, I am from Georgia. We represent three different parts of the country, East to West and in the middle. I think it is very interesting that all three of us have heard the same concerns from our constituents over the last 3 weeks. Basically they are the same things that we all campaigned on last summer and that are contained within the Contract With America. It is exciting to me to see the people all over the country as excited about politics and about what is going on in Washington as they are. Obviously we all shared the same experiences concerning these issues. I think that is very interesting, and again goes to reinforce that the American people did speak on November 8, that the American people want changes, and even though they may not agree with every single thing we are doing in Washington right now, they understand we are doing something. I heard that again time after time: ``We may not agree with everything you're doing, but by golly, you guys are doing something, you're making progress, and just keep at it.'' That probably was the most constant theme I had the whole time I was home.

Mr. CHAMBLISS. The wetlands issue, as you mentioned, is a classic example of overregulation by the Federal Government. Right now if you have a wetlands problem in a particular area in any county in the United States, any one of four agencies, the EPA, the USDA, Fish and Wildlife, can come in, and the Corps of Engineers can come in, and make a determination on that as to whether or not it is a wetlands, and what you have to do about it. Why should you have four Federal agencies involved in one issue like that? The sad part about it is that you may get four different answers from all four of those agencies. I had one gentleman at one of my town hall meetings who gave me a personal experience of exactly that, that he had all four agencies involved in his particular wetlands issue, and he got three different--he didn't get four, but he got three different answers to a question that he had about his wetlands problem.

Mr. CHAMBLISS

Mr. CHAMBLISS. Mr. Speaker, the Atkinson High School Rebels, of Pearson, GA, captured their first Georgia State Basketball Championship in school history, 71 to 64, over Decatur in the 1995 Class A boys title game on Sunday, March 11. The Rebels played inspired basketball despite the loss of someone very dear to the team and community. Ralph Foster, former pastor of Pearson Methodist Church, was a tremendous influence on a team destined to win the State title. The Rebels rallied around the loss of Foster as they dedicated the season and State championship to the late pastor and presented Mrs. Velma Foster with the trophy following the championship game. Coach Mike Putman has helped to build the character and work ethic necessary for these young athletes to succeed in life as well as the basketball court. Tough defense along with a balanced scoring attack were key ingredients as this group exemplified commitment to the team effort. The good people of the Eighth District are proud of these young athletes and their ability to set and stay focused on their goals during a time of great adversity. We salute their efforts and congratulate their accomplishments.

Mr. CHAMBLISS

Mr. CHAMBLISS. Mr. Speaker, the Dodge County High Indians boys basketball team recently won the AA Georgia State Championship for the first time in the 37 year history of the school. The Indians tenacious defense and unselfishness on the offensive side of the ball is a tribute to their commitment to the team effort. These young athletes have demonstrated the desire and will to win that is a reflection of the support and direction of the Dodge County community. Dodge County is coached by second-year head coach Willis Jones who has helped in building a competitive attitude based on the unity and work ethic necessary for these athletes to excel as they venture into the ever competitive game of life. The development of these skills will prove vital as this group prepares for their future. Through hard work and dedication along with their commitment to the ``TEAM'', these athletes are an inspiration to the people of the Eighth District and we salute their efforts.

Mr. CHAMBLISS

Mr. CHAMBLISS. Mr. Speaker, today is truly a historic day in the House as it is on the verge of doing what should have been done many years ago, reform a welfare program that does not work for the poorest Americans. The Republican welfare reform bill will cap benefits and allow States to decide for themselves how to prioritize their resources. Our bill tightens up enforcement provisions against deadbeat dads, encourages welfare recipients to work, and discourages illegitimacy. I have a message for the other side of the aisle and it is the same message the American people sent last November: The time has come to reassess the Federal Government's role in the lives of the American people. That means making the tough decisions and learning for the first time in Washington to say ``No.'' Mr. Speaker, our position is clear: The new majority is passing its contract. Bills that matter to the American people. Meanwhile, the minority is reduced to scare-tactics aimed at children and the elderly. Mr. Speaker, the wheels are not coming off this contract, they are just beginning to turn.

Mr. CHAMBLISS

Mr. CHAMBLISS. Mr. Speaker, I wish to offer today some brief very sobering facts: Illegitimacy rates in this country have quadrupled in 25 years. Welfare has gone from a short-term stay to a way of life with 13 years being the average length of stay, including repeats spells. After 5 years on welfare, the average family will have received at least $60,000 in benefits tax free. In 1970, the proportion of teen mothers who were unmarried was 30 percent. By 1992, it was 72 percent. Mr. Speaker, these are just a few facts that clearly demonstrate that our current welfare system is a failure. Instead of providing hope, compassion, and opportunity, our failed Federal welfare system has only created more Government dependency and misery. In fact, nothing could be more cruel to welfare recipients and children than the system we have today. However, this cycle need not continue. Our welfare reform package provides tough love for welfare recipients giving them hope, independence, and opportunity. We strive to break the cycle of welfare dependency. I ask support of the Republican package this week.

Mr. CHAMBLISS

Mr. CHAMBLISS. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding. I would just like to say in my hometown, Colquitt County, GA, the DARE Program has been extremely important in our educational system. The program has been in effect for the last 4 or 5 years, during which period of time we have had numerous incidents of the police officers who come into the school being looked upon as role models by the other students. This had led not only to an increase in awareness of the drug situation and alcoholism in our homes, but it also provided many other benefits in the area of child abuse. It is a program that I am very familiar with, my wife having been a teacher for 25 years in our public school system. It is something that has worked very well; it is something that is needed and I support the gentleman's amendment.

Mr. CHAMBLISS. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield? a moment to discuss the DARE Program.

Mr. CHAMBLISS

Mr. CHAMBLISS. Mr. Speaker, unfortunately, when the vote on the Common Sense Legal Standard Reform Act was taken a few minutes ago, I was across the hall meeting with some folks in my State on a very important matter. I did not hear my beeper, nor did I hear the bells, and I just wish to insert in the Record the fact that had I been present during the vote, I would have voted affirmatively on that bill.

Mr. CHAMBLISS

Mr. CHAMBLISS. I enjoyed this colloquy, Mr. Speaker.